Draft and Trade Talk Message Board
Close between Foles and Brady as both should be mid to low end QB1s. I favor Brady simply because the Pats offense is less run focused. But they are so close it's really personal preference. Yes, Mathews is worth acquiring for either QB.
WRs? Read what you wrote and tell me about the "high volume" that you expect from Tavon Austin. You just made the most cogent argument imaginable for cutting him and getting more reasonable RB depth. I play only PPR. On one team last season with a must start 2 WRs setting I owned precisely 2: Dez and Gordon, knowing there was a raft of WR2-4s sitting on the waiver wire. Here's a wild guess of 5 free agent WRs in your league that will all out target Austin: Rueben Randle, Jerome Cotchery, Steve Smith, Danny Amendola, Jordan Mathews....and I could come up with a dozen more. There is simply no reason to waste roster spots on readily replaceable guys.
Yep, pretty crazy. Somewhat surprisingly in 2013 Carson Palmer averaged 19 fantasy points vs the "tough" NFC West defenses and 17 vs the "soft underbelly" of the rest of the (weaker) defenses that he faced. Andre Ellington? Same.
Don't judge who you draft by the supposed "strength of schedule" that the player faces. The strong and weak vary every season and we predict them poorly (sure, raise your hand those of you who knew KC would be the top scoring fantasy defense in 2013 through 12 games?).
The 9rs and Seahawks have a number of issues this season and likely regress. Arizona has now lost BOTH of its middle LBs and so on. No, I'm very pleased that people will avoid Crabtree. He's that much cheaper for value and talent seekers like me.
- Ol' Blues Ol' Blues Jul 11, 2014 1:34 PM Flag
Disagree. Gates returns. Gates as an aged declining TE remains as good as Green and dilutes Green's upside. But, suppose I'm wrong. Why have 2 TEs on a limited space roster? It's nonsensical.
- Reply to acb Jul 11, 2014 11:29 AMOl' Blues Ol' Blues Jul 11, 2014 12:23 PM Flag
Interesting. It's very hard for me to seriously consider any high picks for Indy simply because I have no confidence in the coaching staff. Last season, lacking both the OLine talent and blocking scheme to do so, Pep and Pagano tried (completely unsuccessfully) game after game to play "ground and pound" and their franchise QB continually saved them. The Blockheads continued with their (lack of a) ground and pound strategy into the playoffs and, once again, quite improbably, Luck saved them once before The Blockheads persistence in their lunacy drowned their team.
The Blockheads are back. What's changed?
- Ol' Blues Ol' Blues Jul 11, 2014 11:45 AM Flag
^^^Out of "characters." Draft strategy? Boost the elite 3 by 1 round. Yes, you have the potential lose out on the other position studs but these settings should separate the elite QBs from the crowd by a significant margin. If, however, you net no elite QB redo your QB tiers to reflect the scoring system. To me that means Ryan, RG3 and Stafford as 4th/5th rounders. If you miss there I would wait very late planning on streaming some combo of Kaep, Wilson, Rivers, Bradford, Fitz, Tannehill, Palmer.
And, yes, I would move up your DST selection and pick a"lesser" defense with an explosive offense (Denver, Pats, Arizona) over a "stud" defense with a suspect offense (Carolina, St. Louis) ...and, no, I wouldn't go round8 for the Hawks or 10 for the 9rs. If all else fails look at the schedule the Steelers have through game 12.
- Ol' Blues Ol' Blues Jul 11, 2014 11:27 AM Flag
Hmmmm...unsure why you willingly subjected yourself to such an odd scoring system, but, no question, it's a thinking person's setup.
QB is tough to figure because it's a passing efficiency as well as volume incentive and the point bonus for yardage is relatively modest in high volume passing attacks. I would look at modeling the efficiency and the number of attempts you anticipate from offenses of interest. In the elite tier at least Peyton and Brees get a boost as you get yardage, volume and efficiency.
Mid tier is a very mixed bag. Inaccuracy and/or volume concerns drop Cam, Brady and Foles and, depending on your view of the likely shape of their 2014 offenses, Wilson and Kaep. RG3? I think his new weapons will increase his efficiency and yardage to QB 4-6 range. Luck? A tough call with The Odd Couple (Pep and Pagano) in charge. Stafford's efficiency should improve this year, but there's a lot of room for improvement: still, I would keep him in the QB 4-6 range. Romo drops to nearly out of QB1 range; volume yes, but Linehan typically signals QB inefficiency, perhaps massively so. Cutler's "top 5 upside" likely disappears: he's good for volume, but the turnovers and inefficiency likely drop him to just a bit above Romo. Ryan I like close to Stafford, perhaps even above both on volume, yardage and the increased odds that "Gonzo's targets" are spread to easier RB check down passes and Harry Douglas underneath. Rivers likely stays as a QB1 in this scoring system as his passing offense is designed for efficiency albeit not yardage, but how high?
Several QB2s are likely to get within shouting distance of your scoring system's QB1, including Bradford (if what we saw at the start of 2013 was real), Tannehill (he should progress and the awful OLine means volumes of short passes), and likely even lowly Fitz (no yardage, but plenty of short passes and his completion percentage should be stellar in a run heavy offense), Manziel and Henne become rosterable.
- Ol' Blues Ol' Blues Jul 11, 2014 10:16 AM Flag
Fascinating. In a traditional QB scoring league (4 not 6 points per passing TD) the detriment of drafting a QB early vs drafting a RB1 early and a QB later is huge. The risk is injury or misguessing on who is a RB1. The same is true of elite WRs over QBs early and the risk of injury or underperformance with elite WRs is less than with RBs.
The belief that drafting a QB early yields a stronger resulting team given the huge depth at QB really isn't supportable. Use the example offered by the threads originator. In 2013 the team drafting Peyton Manning exited the fantasy playoffs at week 15 because of Peyton's underperformance vs the Chargers and the fantasy team streaming Foles or McCown advanced to the fantasy championship game. Why? Because Manning's poor game could not be compensated for by the elite WR that should have been drafted instead of Peyton and the team streaming Foles had an elite WR producing in Peyton's "draft spot."
You can make similar comparisons with any set of players. Until the scoring gap between QBs becomes wider...and, if anything, the gap narrows annually...drafting a QB with a premium pick puts a hole in your fantasy roster that is very difficult to backfill.
- Ol' Blues Ol' Blues Jul 11, 2014 9:52 AM Flag
Pretty much the obvious: you lack RB depth and have excess receiving depth. With luck you can make it 1/2 way through the season with 3 RBs, but 1 injury and you have to rip the team apart to secure startable backs. At WR you get by with 1 backup or, as I did on 1 team after the bye weeks last season, none. Keep in mind that the difference between WR60 and WR25 typically is less than 1/2 point per game. In more graphic terms Markus Wheaton likely out points Torrey Smith 6 games out of 16. So, if injury, poor matchup or the like causes you to need another WR go to the waiver wire. The same is true of your excess TE: he occupies space to no productive end. Populate your bench with potential difference makers not space takers.
- Reply to co Jul 11, 2014 4:51 AMOl' Blues Ol' Blues Jul 11, 2014 9:32 AM Flag
Charles is consistently rated as #1 PPR back and you certainly won't go wrong there. My concern is the obvious: salary cap issues caused massive defections in KC principally hitting the OLine. Charles still should have a banner year. I can even see his receptions increasing slightly over last season's massive totals, but I don't see the Chiefs as a strong rushing team particularly with what figures to be a much tougher set of run defenses to face this year.
Easily #1 on my radar is McCoy. He runs behind the #1 OLine in football. Chip Kelly just cut fully 1/3rd of the Eagles passing offense (DeSean). The Eagles are the most run heavy offense in the NFL and the most productive running offense. Yet, McCoy has natural talent as a receiver and will see plenty of use in the passing game. Play volume alone should make up for the addition of Sproles and whatever the theoretical "hit" he supposedly brings to McCoy's touches.
In PPR Forte comes next and, while he might challenge Charles for #2 due to his role in a far more explosive offense than KC's, I don't see Forte getting the rushing load or total touches in store for McCoy.
AP? Sorry for being sacrilegious but he's a pretty distant 4th in PPR. Yes, "Norvelous'" offense may put more passing juice to RBs in AP's game, but not the volume the other 3 are pretty certain to achieve.
- Ol' Blues Ol' Blues Jul 11, 2014 12:54 AM Flag
It's way too early to know. If he's active at camp start and through the preseason he may go in the first. If he's PUPed the 6th may be too early. Right now in Yahoo's auction drafts he's going as the third TE off the board at roughly 40% of Graham's price and 75-80% of Thomas.' That says roughly round 3-4 is the target area.
- Ol' Blues Ol' Blues Jul 10, 2014 9:13 PM Flag
From reading the board it's highly likely the 4 elite RBs, Calvin AND D. Thomas will be in the redraft pool. To me, as good as Graham is, the only one of these 6 that I would take after Graham in a PPR league is AP (and many regard that as sacrilege). Absent a "perfect" draft, which rarely happens, I don't view Graham as the best pick. Good luck.
- Ol' Blues Ol' Blues Jul 10, 2014 9:05 PM Flag
Gibbs gave you the customary solid advice: you need better RB depth. ACB's point is also a good one. Your TEs are so strong you can likely use one for trade. You have more WR depth than you need. As more clarity emerges from preseason use your excess WRs to stock up elsewhere, particularly at RB, it's THE most injured position and "starters" change quickly.
Many will likely critique your QBs as "weak" for a 10 team league. I'm not convinced that's true, but, obviously, if one of the elite 3 QBs was on offer in a package that makes sense that would be a significant upgrade.
- Ol' Blues Ol' Blues Jul 10, 2014 8:51 PM Flag
I'm not enthused about any. Of this group Cameron is the only relatively certain top 5 at his position, but round 6 is roughly his value. So, to me there is significantly more value in Tate and Cutler who should outproduce their rounds fairly easily. If the decision on keepers can be delayed for awhile reexamine Tate's ADP before making your choice. It's been falling like a rock and that could continue.
- Ol' Blues Ol' Blues Jul 9, 2014 6:55 PM Flag
Since no one has put on pads it's way too early to tell, but the Way Too Early Handicapping is Sanders, Wallace and Cooks. Cooks draws last because we have no idea how well he lands on his feet. His role could be significant, but missing OTAs due to late graduation puts him behind the learning curve. Sanders is in the very best offense by a good margin, early reports suggest he's performing well and is precisely the type of route runner that thrives under Peyton. Wallace I also like, but Miami has huge issues and is the one offense in these 3 that is pedestrian at best.
- Ol' Blues Ol' Blues Jul 9, 2014 9:54 AM Flag
Poor choice of words, perhaps. Accurate as to Schottenheimer/Fisher, but not for Washington. You put it better in terms of Alf's limitations in the passing game. My concern for Alf is Gruden's tendency to compartmentalize players. Both Gio and Marvin offered far more playmaking ability than their counterparts, yet we saw them underused by Gruden in favor of Sanu and The Law Firm. That may well happen to Morris this season as Gruden likes to throw to his backs and that's not Morris' game.
- Ol' Blues Ol' Blues Jul 9, 2014 9:46 AM Flag
While I can't find the post here, someone mentioned the FootballGuys QB by committee article which pairs QBs by their supposed strength of schedule. It's a useful tool but has its risks because we are notoriously inaccurate in forecasting the good and bad teams. So, for example, who new the Texans and Falcons would become doormats last season or that the Chiefs, winners of 2 games in 2012, would become a top defense through game 11 of 2013? Pair QBs based on your view of the seasonal matchups not what the article projects.